Is It Time to Review Guidelines for ETT Positioning in the NICU? SCEPTIC—Survey of Challenges Encountered in Placement of Endotracheal Tubes in Canadian NICUs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. To examine current opinions and practices regarding endotracheal tube placement across several Canadian Neonatal Intensive Care Units. Design. Clinical directors from Canadian Neonatal Network affiliated NICUs and Neonatal-Perinatal Programs across Canada were invited via email to participate in and disseminate the online survey to staff neonatologists, neonatal fellows, respiratory therapists, and nurse practitioners. Result. There is wide variability in the beliefs and practices related to ETT placement. The majority use "weight +6" formula and "aim to black line" on ETT at vocal cords to estimate the depth of an oral ETT and reported estimation as challenging in ELBW infants. The majority agreed that mid-trachea is an ideal ETT tip position; however their preferred position on chest X-ray varied. Many believe that ETT positioning could be improved with more precise ETT markings. Conclusion. Further research should focus on developing more effective guidelines for ETT tip placement in the ELBW infants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it